The left loses their minds over Hobby Lobby decision

posted at 12:41 pm on June 30, 2014 by Noah Rothman

I imagine the horrified shrieks that rose from the streets outside the Supreme Court on Monday as the decision in the Hobby Lobby case began to filter out into the crowd of liberal observers was reminiscent of those poor souls who watched helplessly as the Triangle Shirtwaist Factory fire claimed the lives of 146 young, female garment workers.

In fact, the similarities are eerie. It seems that liberal commentators have convinced themselves that, just as was the case in 1911, the courts and the country have deemed women to be of lesser value than their male counterparts. The distinction between these two eras, of course, is that while that argument could be supported in 1911, it exists only in the heads of progressives in 2014.

NBC News journalist Pete Williams, an accomplished reporter who is not prone to indulge in speculation, went out of his way to insist repeatedly that the Court’s decision in this case was a narrow one. He noted that the decision extends only to the specific religious objections a handful of employers raised about providing abortifacients (as opposed to contraceptives). Williams added that Justice Anthony Kennedy allowed in his concurring opinion that the federal government can pay for and provide that coverage if employers would not.

The Federalist published a variety of other observations about this ruling which indicate that it was narrowly tailored to this specific case. The Court ruled that Hobby Lobby and other employers could not simply drop health coverage in order to avoid mandates. This decision does not apply to other government mandates like those requiring employers cover vaccinations. Finally, if the will of the public in the form of an electoral mandate creates a groundswell of support for a government-funded program which provides access to abortifacients, then that would be perfectly constitutional.

Williams’ MSNBC colleagues nodded along and, when asked for their contribution, proceeded to display none of this NBC reporter’s caution.

“I think we’ve seen a real goal post-moving here,” MSNBC.com’s Irin Carmon said. “We may say it is a narrow ruling because Taco Bell and Wal-Mart can’t opt out, but it is still an enormous expansion of corporate rights and of the refusal from the laws that are passed to create benefits for everybody.”

“The larger doctrinal implication here is potentially significant,” MSNBC host Ari Melber agreed. “For the first time, the Court is going and taking the First Amendment rights that we’ve seen long established for certain corporate entities and extending them to the religious idea.”

“Just because it was only restricted to women’s health access doesn’t mean that it doesn’t create a devastating precedent which says that women’s health care should be treated differently,” Carmon added. She added that the Republican Party is the biggest beneficiary of today’s ruling. “So, the context of this is an all-out assault on access to contraception and access to other reproductive health care services.”

HotAir’s Karl has accumulated some of the best examples of liberal “schadenfreude,” as he’s dubbed it, in which the left utterly and intentionally misconstrues the scope of this ruling. Incidentally, their reaction also helps to service what appears to be a widely shared victimhood fantasy.

We’ve seen indications that the left believes this decision is a prelude to theocracy:

The Supreme Court #HobbyLobby ruling proves once again that Scalia Law is a lot like Sharia Law.

It is interesting that there seems to be more outrage over this decision from the left than there was when the Court struck down dated portions of the Voting Rights Act. Though that decision had much farther reaching legal and political implications, this is the issue that has captured the passions of the left.

The Green family has no moral objection to the use of 16 of 20 preventive contraceptives required in the mandate, and Hobby Lobby will continue its longstanding practice of covering these preventive contraceptives for its employees. However, the Green family cannot provide or pay for four potentially life-threatening drugs and devices. These drugs include Plan B and Ella, the so-called morning-after pill and the week-after pill. Covering these drugs and devices would violate their deeply held religious belief that life begins at the moment of conception, when an egg is fertilized.

And the other part of your argument that is so morally bankrupt is when you say things like “for birth control see aspirin between the knees.” Birth control helps women in a variety of ways, that has nothing to do with preventing pregnancy. My sister uses birth control because she has crippling cramps every month on her cycle if she doesn’t. I grew up in a household where I saw her incredible pain, and I feel like conservative men with female siblings must have seen that to. Given that birth control can provide women relief from that pain, isn’t that enough of a warrant for subsidizing them?

But here is where it gets sticky. I wonder, how many of you will have the stones, so to speak, to admit that you think women should go through that pain because it is the “curse of Eve.” Be honest.

In future cases, the Hobby Lobbies will argue they have the right to exclude gay people from being employed because their religion considers those people (if practicing) to be sinners and they need to enforce religious-based beliefs at their companies.

So you completely missed, or are deliberately ignoring the part where Hobby Lobby IS willing to cover 16 other prescriptions that they consider to be preventive versus abortive, and do the other things you mentioned?

Which is it? Deliberate ignorance to twist the story, or just lack of reading comprehension?

But Hobby Lobby’s 401k plan invests in funds that include contraception suppliers. When you think about it, what else is a growth industry given the ACA, but contraception. Here’s all the research on Hobby Lobby’s employment benefit plan:

So every time a Hobby Lobby employee retires, they begin to live the rest of their days, in part, off of the death of unborn children. How do these devoted Christians explain that one?

Oh that’s right, they won’t have to. Because sycophants like yourself, who love nothing so much as to worship at the feet of corporate overlords, no matter their behavior, will find a way to claim that this isn’t massively hypocritical, that it doesn’t directly violate Christ’s prohibition on profiting on things that are in violation of your creed. You’ll find every which way to say “but don’t look at that.” Oh yeah, you’ll say “squirrel” or something. But every honest reader knows this shows how utterly faithless and unprincipled these people really are. You won, but your victory also exposes the complete hollow bullcrap of the evangelical movement. Congrats.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:32 PM

Ha ha ha.

That’s the best you’ve got?

And you lefties are a joke. We don’t worship corporations – we realize that liberty means that some people will make decisions we like and others won’t. Some corporations merit accolades and others do not. But you marxists think that there is only complete domination by government or corporations and you prefer government dole out property and “rights” and “freedoms” which is an argument so easily dismantled by reason and history that you fascists have to depend on an uninformed electorate to vote for it.

You need to think about the implications of this ruling. There’s the usual crud about how it’s narrow, doesn’t apply to yadda, yadda, yadda, but the effect is to recognize a private for profit close corporation’s right to practice religion. In future cases, the Hobby Lobbies will argue they have the right to exclude gay people from being employed because their religion considers those people (if practicing) to be sinners and they need to enforce religious-based beliefs at their companies.

jim56 on June 30, 2014 at 2:28 PM

Sweetie, I’ve thought and written about this subject for years. It amazes me. I’m a atheist and have no fear of Christians. You guys act like they are ISIS.

And, while I would disagree with an employer firing or declining to hire someone based upon his/her sexual orientation, such is not a protected category under Federal law. Many states do prohibit it.

Since you failed to respond to this post on the other thread, I direct you to it again:

We know you’re stupid. Why do you keep proving it. The investments are in mutual funds, not directly in those companies.

22044 on June 30, 2014 at 2:35 PM

I’m sorry what? Excuse me? Are you saying that in one instance, contraceptives are the tool to block the unborn from reaching life, and in the other instance they are “investments in a mutual fund.” How does that square with the absolutist character of Hobby Lobby’s purported religious beliefs. Remember, their argument is that they have the right to speculate that their employees use contraceptives as an abortificant, because if an employee does so, then they have subsidized a behavior that violates their religious beliefs.

What is it about a mutual fund that allows Hobby Lobby’s ownership to *not* speculate that their investments in mutual funds would contribute to the production of abortificants. That is what investment is. They offer money to facilitate supply and then get a return on their investment when the consumer purchases the item. So the people buying the items from the contraception producers are *not* violating Hobby Lobby’s beleifs–even as they profit on the sale–but supplying for their employees does?

Or is it about the amount of money? Are you saying there’s a certain amount of investment/profit/expenditure that violates religious beliefs, and they managed to avoid that? Seriously explain it to me. How can Hobby Lobby claim religious protection against contraception mandates and invest in contraception companies?

And the other part of your argument that is so morally bankrupt is when you say things like “for birth control see aspirin between the knees.” Birth control helps women in a variety of ways, that has nothing to do with preventing pregnancy. My sister uses birth control because she has crippling cramps every month on her cycle if she doesn’t. I grew up in a household where I saw her incredible pain, and I feel like conservative men with female siblings must have seen that to. Given that birth control can provide women relief from that pain, isn’t that enough of a warrant for subsidizing them?

But here is where it gets sticky. I wonder, how many of you will have the stones, so to speak, to admit that you think women should go through that pain because it is the “curse of Eve.” Be honest.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:35 PM

The type of “birth control” your sister needs is not the kind that HL refuses to supply.

They are not against birth control. they are opposed to abortion.

I know that makes no difference to you, but to claim that HL doesn’t provide birth control is a lie.

And the other part of your argument that is so morally bankrupt is when you say things like “for birth control see aspirin between the knees.” Birth control helps women in a variety of ways, that has nothing to do with preventing pregnancy. My sister uses birth control because she has crippling cramps every month on her cycle if she doesn’t. I grew up in a household where I saw her incredible pain, and I feel like conservative men with female siblings must have seen that to. Given that birth control can provide women relief from that pain, isn’t that enough of a warrant for subsidizing them?

But here is where it gets sticky. I wonder, how many of you will have the stones, so to speak, to admit that you think women should go through that pain because it is the “curse of Eve.” Be honest.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:35 PM

You’re such a parody at this point.

But it’s good to see you fully support fascism to make people adhere to your morals.

This is a typical tactic by you leftist children…find the 1% of 1% of reasons to justify your warped morals when we all know the reason for every belief you have is to get out of any responsibility from needing to get yourself off on a constant basis.

You use this same laughable tactic with abortion by throwing the rape scenario out there.

Except that Hobby Lobby never said that their employees can’t use contraceptives (in fact, the insurance plan covers 16 of the 20), just that certain ones would not be paid for as part of their employee health insurance.

Which somehow relates to their 401K plan…how, exactly?

Your side already got smacked down by the SCOTUS 19 years ago on this nonsense. It’s calling piling “inference upon inference.” IOW, since we can play six degrees of separation and somehow connect HL to contraception, their religious beliefs must be fraudulent.

I’m sorry what? Excuse me? Are you saying that in one instance, contraceptives are the tool to block the unborn from reaching life, and in the other instance they are “investments in a mutual fund.” How does that square with the absolutist character of Hobby Lobby’s purported religious beliefs. Remember, their argument is that they have the right to speculate that their employees use contraceptives as an abortificant, because if an employee does so, then they have subsidized a behavior that violates their religious beliefs.

Remember, their argument is that they have the right to speculate that their employees use contraceptives as an abortificant, because if an employee does so, then they have subsidized a behavior that violates their religious beliefs.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:41 PM

No. they just don’t want to pay for it. It’s not the same as forcing them not to use it. You seem to think people don’t have agency unless someone is acting on their behalf, and there fore someone must be coerced to do so.

But Hobby Lobby’s 401k plan invests in funds that include contraception suppliers. When you think about it, what else is a growth industry given the ACA, but contraception. Here’s all the research on Hobby Lobby’s employment benefit plan:

So every time a Hobby Lobby employee retires, they begin to live the rest of their days, in part, off of the death of unborn children. How do these devoted Christians explain that one?

Oh that’s right, they won’t have to. Because sycophants like yourself, who love nothing so much as to worship at the feet of corporate overlords, no matter their behavior, will find a way to claim that this isn’t massively hypocritical, that it doesn’t directly violate Christ’s prohibition on profiting on things that are in violation of your creed. You’ll find every which way to say “but don’t look at that.” Oh yeah, you’ll say “squirrel” or something. But every honest reader knows this shows how utterly faithless and unprincipled these people really are. You won, but your victory also exposes the complete hollow bullcrap of the evangelical movement. Congrats.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:32 PM

The HL has the right to be hypocrites on this. But remember the HL is under no obligation to pay higher-than-minimum wage, offer 401k plans or pay for their health insurance at all.

The Obama administration argued if they didn;t like the mandate, they could just pay the fine. They went to court because they still wanted to give their employees health insurance, as they did before Obamacare came along.

Which do you think the employees would take? Insurance that doesn’t cover contraceptives or no insurance at all.

Perhaps you should think of them as people instead of your personal football.

You need to think about the implications of this ruling. There’s the usual crud about how it’s narrow, doesn’t apply to yadda, yadda, yadda, but the effect is to recognize a private for profit close corporation’s right to practice religion. In future cases, the Hobby Lobbies will argue they have the right to exclude gay people from being employed because their religion considers those people (if practicing) to be sinners and they need to enforce religious-based beliefs at their companies.

jim56 on June 30, 2014 at 2:28 PM

Yes, slave, we get it, and we rejoice, against you.

What the bigger corporations will do, to your dismay.

The board of directors/CEO of a ‘regular’ corporation, to the other owners/shareholders “you are all adopted! Welcome to the family”

But here is where it gets sticky. I wonder, how many of you will have the stones, so to speak, to admit that you think women should go through that pain because it is the “curse of Eve.” Be honest.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:35 PM

For one, Hobby Lobby covers that, so your crocodile tears are sweet, if a bit unecessary.. Also, for some companies that are more strict than Hobbly Lobby, that would be a prescription that would most probably be covered.

Oh that’s right, they won’t have to. Because sycophants like yourself, who love nothing so much as to worship at the feet of corporate overlords, no matter their behavior, will find a way to claim that this isn’t massively hypocritical, that it doesn’t directly violate Christ’s prohibition on profiting on things that are in violation of your creed. You’ll find every which way to say “but don’t look at that.” Oh yeah, you’ll say “squirrel” or something. But every honest reader knows this shows how utterly faithless and unprincipled these people really are. You won, but your victory also exposes the complete hollow bullcrap of the evangelical movement. Congrats.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:32 PM

You should see where your university invests it’s endowment funds. You would resign in protest….if you weren’t a hypocrite. Girl, bye.

Remember, their argument is that they have the right to speculate that their employees use contraceptives as an abortificant, because if an employee does so, then they have subsidized a behavior that violates their religious beliefs.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:41 PM

No, that’s really not their argument:

The Green family has no moral objection to the use of 16 of 20 preventive contraceptives required in the mandate, and Hobby Lobby will continue its longstanding practice of covering these preventive contraceptives for its employees.

They cover 16 contraceptive medicines, likely including the one your sister needs for her cramps.

the Hobby Lobbies will argue they have the right to exclude gay people from being employed because their religion considers those people (if practicing) to be sinners and they need to enforce religious-based beliefs at their companies.

jim56 on June 30, 2014 at 2:28 PM

No fool, that has already been law and decided on by the courts…you are so stupid, you use an argument that supports the opposition.

You are arguing with yourself, using arguments to defeat your premise…good grief, never made the debate team in grammar school I see.

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!

What’s even more funny, is the libs went out and traced down gays/lesbians that work for Hobby Lobby, they had nothing but great things to say about the culture….

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!! You guys are so desperate…pathetic, but entertaining.

In future cases, the Hobby Lobbies will argue they have the right to exclude gay people from being employed because their religion considers those people (if practicing) to be sinners and they need to enforce religious-based beliefs at their companies.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:32 PM
libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:41 PM

All from the guy who lives off wealth transfers from poorer students and tax payers to instruct future generations in the marketable skills found in “inequality studies”. He hats inequality – which is why he’ll take money from those who have less than him even if it’s done forcibly by the state.

Oh that’s right, they won’t have to. Because sycophants like yourself, who love nothing so much as to worship at the feet of corporate overlords, no matter their behavior, will find a way to claim that this isn’t massively hypocritical, that it doesn’t directly violate Christ’s prohibition on profiting on things that are in violation of your creed. You’ll find every which way to say “but don’t look at that.” Oh yeah, you’ll say “squirrel” or something. But every honest reader knows this shows how utterly faithless and unprincipled these people really are. You won, but your victory also exposes the complete hollow bullcrap of the evangelical movement. Congrats.

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:32 PM

You should see where your university invests it’s endowment funds. You would resign in protest….if you weren’t a hypocrite. Girl, bye.

The levels of mass delusion are breathtaking. This goes beyond the typical truth-bending and demagoguery we see in politics. I honestly wonder if there’s a significant element of mental illness at play here.

All from the guy who lives off wealth transfers from poorer students and tax payers to instruct future generations in the marketable skills found in “inequality studies”. He hats inequality – which is why he’ll take money from those who have less than him even if it’s done forcibly by the state.

gwelf on June 30, 2014 at 2:54 PM

For the fascist, having it done forcibly by the state ‘blesses’ and legitimizes the action.

Given that birth control can provide women relief from that pain, isn’t that enough of a warrant for subsidizing them?

libfreeordie on June 30, 2014 at 2:35 PM

No. They should be covered for women who genuinely need them for a medical condition outside of contraception. They shouldn’t covered just so people can have sex.

What is so funny is the hysterics over an item that costs less than a value meal at McDonalds and that is without insurance.

Liberals look like fools here. No one is advocating taking birth control pills off the market. No one is saying women should be restricted from buying them. All we are saying is people should be personally responsible to take care of themselves without counting on others to pay their way. Or do you liberals think us women are too stupid to get birth control on our own?

Read my comments on the other posts. I’m hoping for a series of “unfortunate” accidents to happen to Hobby Lobby stores and the Greens.

jim56 on June 30, 2014 at 1:16 PM

Brings to mind the fact that the left is responsible for the vast majority of assassinations and mass murders in this country. Just another example of leftist hatred, because, that’s who they really are.

None of us, and it were my sister, I would give her the $10 a month for her not to be in pain…what kind of sibling allows their sister, for just $10 a month to live in such pain?

right2bright on June 30, 2014 at 2:47 PM

Well, see? LFoD just wants the government to have the same relationship to you as a brother. A big brother. A very big brother who will beat you up and take your money in order to provide for his sister.

I was out shopping when I heard the news of the ruling on the car radio. On my way by, I stopped in and bought something at Hobby Lobby to show my appreciation for taking this to SCOTUS. A Hobby Lobby appreciation day would be interesting, especially if it is as successful as the one for Chick-Fil-A was.

Why don’t all of the many, many, many Leftist millionaires and billionaires get together and create their own privately funded charity to give away abortion pills to anyone that wants them, free of charge.

They could do this tomorrow, hundreds of times over, coast to coast. But they won’t. Why?